Yeah, see, telling a non-sports-loving, non-American nerd (me) that Lebron James is the basketball equivalent of Peyton Manning doesn't help, because then my next question inevitably is: Who the hell is Peyton Manning?
I suppose neither one of these guys has managed to have dozen mistresses at once, because I sure do know who Tiger Woods is.
You gotta hand it to the CIA. When they attack something like Wikileaks, they really take the long view.
Well, I don't see anything in the article as being particularly discrediting to Julian Assange. It appears that he has a secret past involving nomadic life and computer hacking. I don't know about the rest of you, but considering his current career pretty much consists of being constantly on the move and publish classified documents online I find that amazingly non-shocking.
Not that the CIA might not be involved in this, they might, what do I know? But if they are, they are either taking the long, long, infinity-can-be-seen-on-a-good-day-long view or are just really inept.
I understand the motivation for blocking interactive sites for paedophiles to exchange their revolting material, but a static public information service? Epic fail.
I'm always skeptical when a relatively harmless activity gets banned in order to "prevent" another, more dangerous one. Child pornography is illegal, and rightfully so. But restricting an entire nation's access to the internet in order to make things more difficult for pedophiles? I don't see the benefits myself, but then I am neither a computer genius (understatement!) nor from Australia, so perhaps I'm missing something.
Personally, I'd rather see increased effort in tracking down the bastards and throwing them in jail.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, see, telling a non-sports-loving, non-American nerd (me) that Lebron James is the basketball equivalent of Peyton Manning doesn't help, because then my next question inevitably is: Who the hell is Peyton Manning?
I suppose neither one of these guys has managed to have dozen mistresses at once, because I sure do know who Tiger Woods is.
You gotta hand it to the CIA. When they attack something like Wikileaks, they really take the long view.
Well, I don't see anything in the article as being particularly discrediting to Julian Assange. It appears that he has a secret past involving nomadic life and computer hacking. I don't know about the rest of you, but considering his current career pretty much consists of being constantly on the move and publish classified documents online I find that amazingly non-shocking.
Not that the CIA might not be involved in this, they might, what do I know? But if they are, they are either taking the long, long, infinity-can-be-seen-on-a-good-day-long view or are just really inept.
I understand the motivation for blocking interactive sites for paedophiles to exchange their revolting material, but a static public information service?
Epic fail.
I'm always skeptical when a relatively harmless activity gets banned in order to "prevent" another, more dangerous one. Child pornography is illegal, and rightfully so. But restricting an entire nation's access to the internet in order to make things more difficult for pedophiles? I don't see the benefits myself, but then I am neither a computer genius (understatement!) nor from Australia, so perhaps I'm missing something.
Personally, I'd rather see increased effort in tracking down the bastards and throwing them in jail.